lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jun]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux 2.4.5-ac15


On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > >
> > > > > 2 4 2 77084 1524 18396 66904 0 1876 108 2220 2464 66079 198 1
> > > ^^^^^
> > > > Ok, I suspect that GFP_BUFFER allocations are fucking up here (they can't
> > > > block on IO, so they loop insanely).
> > >
> > > Why doesn't the VM hang the syncing of queued IO on these guys via
> > > wait_event or such instead of trying to just let the allocation fail?
> ...
> > > Does failing the allocation in fact accomplish more than what I'm
> > > (uhoh:) assuming?
> >
> > No.
>
> hmm..
>
> Jun 18 07:11:36 kernel: reclaim_page: salvaged ref:1 age:0 buf:0 cnt:1
> Jun 18 07:11:36 last message repeated 27 times
>
> One thing that _could_ be done about looping allocations is to steal
> a page from the clean list ignoring PageReferenced (if you have any).
> That would be a very expensive 'rob Peter to pay Paul' trade though.

Don't like it.

This goes against the aging logic.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:55    [W:0.037 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site